On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 11:01:18AM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote: > On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 10:58 AM Corey Huinker <corey.huin...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > + <entry>if you are reading this prepatorily, please redesign your > query to use temporary tables or arrays</entry> > > > I agree with the documentation of this parameter. > I agree with dissuading anyone from attempting to change it > The wording is bordering on snark (however well deserved) and I think the > voice is slightly off. > > Alternate suggestion: > > > Queries approaching this limit usually can be refactored to use arrays > or temporary tables, thus reducing parameter overhead. > > > The bit about parameter overhead appeals to the reader's desire for > performance, rather than just focusing on "you shouldn't want this". > > > Yeah, the wording is a bit tongue-in-cheek. Figured assuming a committer > wants > this at all we'd come up with better wording. I like your suggestion.
Does this come up enough to document it? I assume the error message the user receives is clear. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> https://momjian.us EDB https://enterprisedb.com Indecision is a decision. Inaction is an action. Mark Batterson